newgroups are the p2p of the future. supposedly because its nearly impossible to get tracked or hunted by the riaa.
any truth to that? or will bit torrent always reign supreme?
Yet another p2p v. usenet thread. Okay, I'm game.
p2p is for little kiddies to play around. Usenet has been around for just about 20+ years, and there were other forms of message/file transfer systems (Fidonet in particular, back almost to the 70's), and even before that.
p2p has the potential, (note please I said 'potential', not reality!), to store and forward material literally until the end of the universe (when the electrons cease to move). All it takes is a bunch of peers to stay up and running, and therein lies the rub.
When p2p came out of the woodwork (Napster in particular) in the late 90's, it's usability lasted about one month. Then it got overrun by 'all the little kiddies'. In short, people with minimal bandwidth (particularly transmit as opposed to receive), and who simply wanted to leech anyway, and would turn on their machine only to grab as fast as they could.
If I had a penny for every file I attempted to get before the peer simply shut down, or even when the protocol improved to enable things like multi-feeding from different sources, even then, when one would have maybe 10 or 20 different peers feeding the same file, they'd ALL shut down before you could finish. Then, the protocol 'improved' once again, and you'd be able to restart days later, then once again, they'd shut down in the middle of the transfer.
Plainly, it was time for the little kiddies to go to bed. And they don't keep their systems alive while they're not in front of it.
But, the 'potential' of having things like movies or music bouncing around the ether for conceivably forever got the 'aa' folks really to notice, especially when newsgroup retention was generally around the lifespan of a fruit fly. Boy, has that changed, and now the guns are being re pointed a bit.
Folks will generally say that the 'upload' part is what they go for, and since most (but not all) p2p folks are indeed uploading into the system, that's a given. But whereas on p2p, those sources are pretty easily identified, on usenet they are not. The servers are commercial entities, with well over a quarter century of case law backing them up.
Folks tend to 'think' that utilizing (for instance) SSL is going to help hide them; and for those using shared transmission systems (like cable or wireless modems), it is. For those directly connected to the actual internet, like DSL, T-Span, or other non-shared systems, it isn't.
Yes, the line can still be 'tapped', but the reasoning for doing so don't exist, unlike 'party-line' shared systems. Although the traffic itself with SSL is encrypted, the destination is (of course) not, so bits headed toward a news-server is pretty obvious.
Now, as storage facilities get larger and larger, as disc space gets cheaper and cheaper, at some point that system gets close to what the p2p is, as far as 'once its there, its there forever'. The text groups are really already there, it's only a matter of time (and physics) until the binary groups get there.
At some point, it will be a wash. Six months retention? (Already there). One year? (Coming up quick) Five Years? (Conceivable, watch as disc prices continue to tumble and even the next generation of technology beyond perpendicular recording hits in the next half-dozen years).
Do a curve of disc capacity v. price. A terabyte